Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Archived » Board committer reps  » XMPP Server for Committers
XMPP Server for Committers [message #9084] Fri, 06 June 2008 12:14 Go to next message
Eclipse Webmaster is currently offline Eclipse Webmaster
Messages: 357198
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Dearly Beloved Board Reps,

I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
Eclipse Committers.

I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72


At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.

Thanks a bundle (pun intended),

Denis


--

Eclipse WebMaster - webmaster@eclipse.org
Questions? Consult the WebMaster FAQ at
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Webmaster_FAQ
View my status at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/WebMaster
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #9104 is a reply to message #9084] Fri, 06 June 2008 14:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Darin Swanson is currently offline Darin Swanson
Messages: 2386
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
It would seem that the Committer reps need to ensure that the board is aware
of what appears to be a staffing issue that is blocking the rollout of a
service that many committers feel would make them more efficient.

Just in time for the June meeting I believe.

Good to see a post in this space ;-)

Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com

"Denis Roy" <webmaster@eclipse.org> wrote in message
news:g2bnpk$33a$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>
> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are requesting
> the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for Eclipse
> Committers.
>
> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>
>
> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>
> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>
> Denis
>
>
> --
>
> Eclipse WebMaster - webmaster@eclipse.org
> Questions? Consult the WebMaster FAQ at
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Webmaster_FAQ
> View my status at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/WebMaster
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #9161 is a reply to message #9104] Mon, 23 June 2008 13:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: slewis.composent.com

Darin Swanson wrote:
> It would seem that the Committer reps need to ensure that the board is aware
> of what appears to be a staffing issue that is blocking the rollout of a
> service that many committers feel would make them more efficient.
>
> Just in time for the June meeting I believe.

As a project lead of a distributed team that needs easier and better
ways to communicate and collaborate

and

one of the persons that is likely to do much of the tech work involved
in setting up, building, and maintaining an XMPP, I believe strongly
that the Foundation IT resource issue that's blocking this can/should be
addressed by the Board.

So, +2 for the Board Reps making the underlying resource issues clear to
the Board, and advocating for addressing these issues.

Scott

>
> Good to see a post in this space ;-)
>
> Darins
> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>
> "Denis Roy" <webmaster@eclipse.org> wrote in message
> news:g2bnpk$33a$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>
>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are requesting
>> the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for Eclipse
>> Committers.
>>
>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>
>>
>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>
>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>
>> Denis
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Eclipse WebMaster - webmaster@eclipse.org
>> Questions? Consult the WebMaster FAQ at
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Webmaster_FAQ
>> View my status at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/WebMaster
>
>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #9181 is a reply to message #9084] Tue, 01 July 2008 18:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: slewis.composent.com

Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>
> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
> Eclipse Committers.
>
> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>
>
> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>
> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>
> Denis
>
>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #9201 is a reply to message #9181] Wed, 02 July 2008 13:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 25750
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the
board needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to
boil down to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
> Beloved Board Reps,
>
> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> Denis Roy wrote:
>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>
>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server
>> for Eclipse Committers.
>>
>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>
>>
>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>
>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>
>> Denis
>>
>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #9221 is a reply to message #9201] Wed, 02 July 2008 16:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Darin Swanson is currently offline Darin Swanson
Messages: 2386
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com

"Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
> Scott,
>
> Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
> needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
> to "there's not enough money for that."
>
>
> Scott Lewis wrote:
>> Beloved Board Reps,
>>
>> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>>
>> Denis Roy wrote:
>>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>>
>>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
>>> Eclipse Committers.
>>>
>>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>>
>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>>
>>>
>>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>>
>>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>>
>>> Denis
>>>
>>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10187 is a reply to message #9221] Wed, 02 July 2008 17:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 25750
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010003010005060003020301
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Darin,

I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.
Adding one thing generally means cutting another. I whined and
complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages that
would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home pages with
crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed off at the pass
and one less questionable activity to tie up the foundation's precious
resource. Did you see Doug's blog about the meeting?
<http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/>

http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/



Darin Swanson wrote:
> Thanks for the update Ed.
>
> I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
> this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
> makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
> Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.
>
> It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
> Darins
> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>
> "Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
>
>> Scott,
>>
>> Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
>> needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
>> to "there's not enough money for that."
>>
>>
>> Scott Lewis wrote:
>>
>>> Beloved Board Reps,
>>>
>>> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Denis Roy wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>>>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
>>>> Eclipse Committers.
>>>>
>>>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>>>
>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>>>
>>>> Denis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>

--------------010003010005060003020301
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Darin,<br>
<br>
I totally agree.&nbsp; It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.&nbsp;
Adding one thing generally means cutting another.&nbsp; I whined and
complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages that
would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home pages
with crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed off at the
pass and one less questionable activity to tie up the foundation's
precious resource.&nbsp; Did you see Doug's blog about the meeting?<a
href="http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/"><br>
</a>
<blockquote><a href="http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/">http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Darin Swanson wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:g4gpf8$49v$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com">http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com</a>

"Ed Merks" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com">&lt;Ed.Merks@gmail.com&gt;</a> wrote in message
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org">news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org</a>...
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dearly Beloved Board Reps,

I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
Eclipse Committers.

I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:

<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72</a>


At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.

Thanks a bundle (pun intended),

Denis


</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->

</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--------------010003010005060003020301--
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10203 is a reply to message #10187] Wed, 02 July 2008 17:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: slewis.composent.com

Hi Ed and Darin,

Ed Merks wrote:
> Darin,
>
> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
> you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.
> Adding one thing generally means cutting another.


This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).

It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need this
(i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do as much
of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT processes, but
it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations (Denis' comment on
bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have priority over, say,
marketing budget, IP process budget, website development, etc?

I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining for
more resources, but I would assert that that process (the committer reps
have to continuously whine and complain and still don't get resources)
means something is broken in the resource allocation function of the
Board.

Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given the
way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination date and
discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and the other
committers that depend upon communications technologies like these to
work effectively with distributed cross-organizational (read actually
diverse) teams.

Scott
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10232 is a reply to message #10187] Wed, 02 July 2008 17:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Darin Swanson is currently offline Darin Swanson
Messages: 2386
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_072D_01C8DC53.6CE9B130
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yes...it was great to see Doug's post on the meeting. Almost as good as =
minutes ;-)

Just for total clarification...my "whine and complain" comment is meant =
in no way to knock the work of the committer reps nor the committers.

It was meant tongue in cheek since I was a committer rep and now am back =
on the other side of the fence strictly as a committer
I am priviledged to have the rarified experience of playing in both =
worlds and know the frustratations of both.

Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
"Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.eclipse.org...
Darin,

I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of =
you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut. =
Adding one thing generally means cutting another. I whined and =
complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages that =
would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home pages with =
crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed off at the pass =
and one less questionable activity to tie up the foundation's precious =
resource. Did you see Doug's blog about the meeting?

http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/



Darin Swanson wrote:=20
Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to =
bring up=20
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget=20
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, =
IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com

"Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message=20
news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the =
board=20
needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down =

to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
Dearly Beloved Board Reps,

I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are=20
requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for =

Eclipse Committers.

I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3D126089#c72


At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.

Thanks a bundle (pun intended),

Denis


=20


------=_NextPart_000_072D_01C8DC53.6CE9B130
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type =
content=3Dtext/html;charset=3DISO-8859-1>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.3268" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY text=3D#000000 bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yes...it was great to see Doug's post =
on the=20
meeting. Almost as good as minutes ;-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just for total clarification...my =
"whine and=20
complain" comment is meant in no way to knock the work of the committer =
reps nor=20
the committers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It was meant tongue in cheek since I =
was a=20
committer rep and now am back on the other side of the fence strictly as =
a=20
committer</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am priviledged to have the rarified =
experience of=20
playing in both worlds and know the frustratations of both.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><BR>Darins<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com">http://runnerwhocodes.blogspo=
t.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Ed Merks" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com">Ed.Merks@gmail.com</A>&gt; wrote in =
message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.eclipse.org">news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.ecli=
pse.org</A>...</DIV>Darin,<BR><BR>I=20
totally agree.&nbsp; It's just frustrating to have the budget in front =
of you=20
and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could =
cut.&nbsp; Adding=20
one thing generally means cutting another.&nbsp; I whined and =
complained about=20
board mandated navigation links on home pages that would be enforced =
by=20
foundation staff actively replacing home pages with crappy but =
conforming=20
ones, so at least that was headed off at the pass and one less =
questionable=20
activity to tie up the foundation's precious resource.&nbsp; Did you =
see=20
Doug's blog about the meeting?<A=20
href=3D"http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/"><BR></A>
<BLOCKQUOTE><A=20
=
href=3D"http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/">http://eclipse-commi=
tter-reps.blogspot.com/</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Darin=20
Swanson wrote:=20
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=3Dmid:g4gpf8$49v$1@build.eclipse.org =
type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to =
bring up=20
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget=20
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, =
IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
<A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com">http://runnerwhocodes.blogspo=
t.com</A>

"Ed Merks" <A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E =
href=3D"mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com">&lt;Ed.Merks@gmail.com&gt;</A> wrote =
in message=20
<A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org">news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.ecli=
pse.org</A>...
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the =
board=20
needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down =

to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Dearly Beloved Board =
Reps,

I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are=20
requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for =

Eclipse Committers.

I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:

<A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3D126089#c72">https=
://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3D126089#c72</A>


At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.

Thanks a bundle (pun intended),

Denis


</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE =
wrap=3D""><!---->

</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_072D_01C8DC53.6CE9B130--
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10265 is a reply to message #10232] Wed, 02 July 2008 18:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: slewis.composent.com

It was rather surprising to see no mention of the XMPP Server for
Committers issue in Doug's notes. Is that because it wasn't discussed,
or because it was discussed but too controversial for a blog (or some
other reason)?

Scott

P.S. Since I was a committer rep also, I empathize with the frustrations
of 'whining and complaining'...we committers are a needful lot aren't
we...I suppose we could eliminate ourselves from the organization as a
cost saving measure...oh yeah...we don't cost anything...doh! ;-)


Darin Swanson wrote:
> Yes...it was great to see Doug's post on the meeting. Almost as good as
> minutes ;-)
>
> Just for total clarification...my "whine and complain" comment is meant
> in no way to knock the work of the committer reps nor the committers.
>
> It was meant tongue in cheek since I was a committer rep and now am back
> on the other side of the fence strictly as a committer
> I am priviledged to have the rarified experience of playing in both
> worlds and know the frustratations of both.
>
> Darins
> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>
> "Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com <mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com>> wrote in
> message news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Darin,
>
> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front
> of you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could
> cut. Adding one thing generally means cutting another. I whined
> and complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages
> that would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home
> pages with crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed
> off at the pass and one less questionable activity to tie up the
> foundation's precious resource. Did you see Doug's blog about the
> meeting?
> <http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/>
>
> http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> Darin Swanson wrote:
>> Thanks for the update Ed.
>>
>> I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
>> this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
>> makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
>> Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.
>>
>> It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
>> Darins
>> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>>
>> "Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
>>
>>> Scott,
>>>
>>> Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
>>> needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
>>> to "there's not enough money for that."
>>>
>>>
>>> Scott Lewis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Beloved Board Reps,
>>>>
>>>> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Denis Roy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>>>>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
>>>>> Eclipse Committers.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>>>>
>>>>> Denis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10298 is a reply to message #10203] Sat, 12 July 2008 15:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: slewis.composent.com

Are the committer reps going to do anything about this issue? If so,
what? If not, why not?

Scott


Scott Lewis wrote:
> Hi Ed and Darin,
>
> Ed Merks wrote:
>> Darin,
>>
>> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
>> you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.
>> Adding one thing generally means cutting another.
>
>
> This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).
>
> It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
> interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need this
> (i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do as much
> of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT processes, but
> it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations (Denis' comment on
> bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have priority over, say,
> marketing budget, IP process budget, website development, etc?
>
> I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining for
> more resources, but I would assert that that process (the committer reps
> have to continuously whine and complain and still don't get resources)
> means something is broken in the resource allocation function of the Board.
>
> Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
> resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given the
> way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination date and
> discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and the other
> committers that depend upon communications technologies like these to
> work effectively with distributed cross-organizational (read actually
> diverse) teams.
>
> Scott
>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10331 is a reply to message #10298] Sat, 12 July 2008 18:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 25750
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Scott,

This month's board meeting was canceled...

I've added Mike to the CC list for his comments. It seems clear that
the proposal has value and is supported. It's not clear that the
administrative overhead to support something like this prohibitive.
It's also not clear that something like this needs to be discussed by
the full board in order to resolve it given that it's a relatively minor
issue that could be handled directly by the EMO and in light of the fact
that various people have volunteered to help. What's your take? Would
a board discussion help bring this to resolution? If we can't resolve
this issue before the next board meeting, let's add it to the agenda...


Scott Lewis wrote:
> Are the committer reps going to do anything about this issue? If so,
> what? If not, why not?
>
> Scott
>
>
> Scott Lewis wrote:
>> Hi Ed and Darin,
>>
>> Ed Merks wrote:
>>> Darin,
>>>
>>> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front
>>> of you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could
>>> cut. Adding one thing generally means cutting another.
>>
>>
>> This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).
>>
>> It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
>> interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need
>> this (i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do
>> as much of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT
>> processes, but it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations
>> (Denis' comment on bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have
>> priority over, say, marketing budget, IP process budget, website
>> development, etc?
>>
>> I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining
>> for more resources, but I would assert that that process (the
>> committer reps have to continuously whine and complain and still
>> don't get resources) means something is broken in the resource
>> allocation function of the Board.
>>
>> Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
>> resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given
>> the way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination
>> date and discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and
>> the other committers that depend upon communications technologies
>> like these to work effectively with distributed cross-organizational
>> (read actually diverse) teams.
>>
>> Scott
>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10364 is a reply to message #10331] Sat, 12 July 2008 21:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: slewis.composent.com

Hi Ed,

Ed Merks wrote:
> Scott,
>
> This month's board meeting was canceled...
>
> I've added Mike to the CC list for his comments. It seems clear that
> the proposal has value and is supported. It's not clear that the
> administrative overhead to support something like this prohibitive.
> It's also not clear that something like this needs to be discussed by
> the full board in order to resolve it given that it's a relatively minor
> issue that could be handled directly by the EMO and in light of the fact
> that various people have volunteered to help. What's your take?
Would
> a board discussion help bring this to resolution?


I don't particularly care if a Board discussion is had or not. I would
just like to see it possible to move forward on doing this (since I am
on the hook for doing much of the actual work involved in setup/config,
admin, etc...and *any* community effort is blocked by this IT resources
issue at the moment).

My larger observation (admittedly without all information, but perhaps
with the necessary information), is that the project's needs to build
software and community requires cooperation, communication, and
collaboration...as diverse projects have teams spread all over the
world. Although largely hidden, the cost of such cooperation,
communication/collaboration is currently unnecessarily high (i.e. takes
a lot of time/effort on someone's part).

If the Foundation/Board want to actually have EF projects work together
rather than as individual silos, and be diverse rather than corporate
pet projects, then they must provide some resources to help them in
doing these things, rather than simply mandate things without providing
any project-level resources (or worse yet, not mandate project diversity
or cross-project collaboration...or worse yet, require the projects to
do other things...like all their own build infrastructure, or their own
integration testing...with little/no assistance/support for doing so).

In my view this is inevitably a choice between allocating EF resources
for other things (e.g. marketing, IP process, councils, strategy, etc)
and 'committer resources'. As a committer member of EF, I believe that
the committers are getting a rather short stick, small slice of
pie...use whatever metaphor is appealing to you...especially compared
with the value they are creating via (e.g.) the Ganymede release.

FWIW, XMPP server is but one such technology/request coming from the
committers. Here are the current Community enhancement requests:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advan ced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&c lassification=Eclipse+Foundation&product=Community&l ong_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc _type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard _type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_typ e=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=A SSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_severity=enhancement &priority=P1&priority=P2&priority=P3&priorit y=P4&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=sub string&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&vot es=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=& ;cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&fie ld0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=

Scott


If we can't resolve
> this issue before the next board meeting, let's add it to the agenda...
>
>
> Scott Lewis wrote:
>> Are the committer reps going to do anything about this issue? If so,
>> what? If not, why not?
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>> Scott Lewis wrote:
>>> Hi Ed and Darin,
>>>
>>> Ed Merks wrote:
>>>> Darin,
>>>>
>>>> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front
>>>> of you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could
>>>> cut. Adding one thing generally means cutting another.
>>>
>>>
>>> This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).
>>>
>>> It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
>>> interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need
>>> this (i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do
>>> as much of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT
>>> processes, but it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations
>>> (Denis' comment on bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have
>>> priority over, say, marketing budget, IP process budget, website
>>> development, etc?
>>>
>>> I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining
>>> for more resources, but I would assert that that process (the
>>> committer reps have to continuously whine and complain and still
>>> don't get resources) means something is broken in the resource
>>> allocation function of the Board.
>>>
>>> Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
>>> resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given
>>> the way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination
>>> date and discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and
>>> the other committers that depend upon communications technologies
>>> like these to work effectively with distributed cross-organizational
>>> (read actually diverse) teams.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10399 is a reply to message #10265] Fri, 01 August 2008 14:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: dcarver.starstandard.org

If there is no time or resources available, why don't the eclipse
committers use one of the many freely available already setup servers
listed at Jabber.org?

http://www.jabber.org/im-services

Seems easier than having to have eclipse setup a server, and get
everything in place.

Dave
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #10531 is a reply to message #10399] Mon, 04 August 2008 01:37 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: slewis.composent.com

Hi Dave/others interested in this thread.

See https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c95 and follow
ups for responses to this question.

Scott

David Carver wrote:
> If there is no time or resources available, why don't the eclipse
> committers use one of the many freely available already setup servers
> listed at Jabber.org?
>
> http://www.jabber.org/im-services
>
> Seems easier than having to have eclipse setup a server, and get
> everything in place.
>
> Dave
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560816 is a reply to message #9084] Fri, 06 June 2008 14:30 Go to previous message
Darin Swanson is currently offline Darin Swanson
Messages: 2386
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
It would seem that the Committer reps need to ensure that the board is aware
of what appears to be a staffing issue that is blocking the rollout of a
service that many committers feel would make them more efficient.

Just in time for the June meeting I believe.

Good to see a post in this space ;-)

Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com

"Denis Roy" <webmaster@eclipse.org> wrote in message
news:g2bnpk$33a$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>
> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are requesting
> the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for Eclipse
> Committers.
>
> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>
>
> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>
> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>
> Denis
>
>
> --
>
> Eclipse WebMaster - webmaster@eclipse.org
> Questions? Consult the WebMaster FAQ at
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Webmaster_FAQ
> View my status at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/WebMaster
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560855 is a reply to message #9104] Mon, 23 June 2008 13:29 Go to previous message
Scott Lewis is currently offline Scott Lewis
Messages: 964
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Darin Swanson wrote:
> It would seem that the Committer reps need to ensure that the board is aware
> of what appears to be a staffing issue that is blocking the rollout of a
> service that many committers feel would make them more efficient.
>
> Just in time for the June meeting I believe.

As a project lead of a distributed team that needs easier and better
ways to communicate and collaborate

and

one of the persons that is likely to do much of the tech work involved
in setting up, building, and maintaining an XMPP, I believe strongly
that the Foundation IT resource issue that's blocking this can/should be
addressed by the Board.

So, +2 for the Board Reps making the underlying resource issues clear to
the Board, and advocating for addressing these issues.

Scott

>
> Good to see a post in this space ;-)
>
> Darins
> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>
> "Denis Roy" <webmaster@eclipse.org> wrote in message
> news:g2bnpk$33a$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>
>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are requesting
>> the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for Eclipse
>> Committers.
>>
>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>
>>
>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>
>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>
>> Denis
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Eclipse WebMaster - webmaster@eclipse.org
>> Questions? Consult the WebMaster FAQ at
>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Webmaster_FAQ
>> View my status at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/WebMaster
>
>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560867 is a reply to message #9084] Tue, 01 July 2008 18:03 Go to previous message
Scott Lewis is currently offline Scott Lewis
Messages: 964
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>
> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
> Eclipse Committers.
>
> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>
>
> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>
> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>
> Denis
>
>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560876 is a reply to message #9181] Wed, 02 July 2008 13:15 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 25750
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the
board needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to
boil down to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
> Beloved Board Reps,
>
> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> Denis Roy wrote:
>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>
>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server
>> for Eclipse Committers.
>>
>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>
>>
>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>
>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>
>> Denis
>>
>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560888 is a reply to message #9201] Wed, 02 July 2008 16:42 Go to previous message
Darin Swanson is currently offline Darin Swanson
Messages: 2386
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com

"Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
> Scott,
>
> Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
> needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
> to "there's not enough money for that."
>
>
> Scott Lewis wrote:
>> Beloved Board Reps,
>>
>> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>>
>> Denis Roy wrote:
>>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>>
>>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
>>> Eclipse Committers.
>>>
>>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>>
>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>>
>>>
>>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>>
>>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>>
>>> Denis
>>>
>>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560900 is a reply to message #9221] Wed, 02 July 2008 17:02 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 25750
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010003010005060003020301
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Darin,

I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.
Adding one thing generally means cutting another. I whined and
complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages that
would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home pages with
crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed off at the pass
and one less questionable activity to tie up the foundation's precious
resource. Did you see Doug's blog about the meeting?
<http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/>

http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/



Darin Swanson wrote:
> Thanks for the update Ed.
>
> I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
> this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
> makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
> Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.
>
> It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
> Darins
> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>
> "Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
>
>> Scott,
>>
>> Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
>> needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
>> to "there's not enough money for that."
>>
>>
>> Scott Lewis wrote:
>>
>>> Beloved Board Reps,
>>>
>>> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Denis Roy wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>>>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
>>>> Eclipse Committers.
>>>>
>>>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>>>
>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>>>
>>>> Denis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>

--------------010003010005060003020301
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Darin,<br>
<br>
I totally agree.&nbsp; It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.&nbsp;
Adding one thing generally means cutting another.&nbsp; I whined and
complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages that
would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home pages
with crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed off at the
pass and one less questionable activity to tie up the foundation's
precious resource.&nbsp; Did you see Doug's blog about the meeting?<a
href="http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/"><br>
</a>
<blockquote><a href="http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/">http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Darin Swanson wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:g4gpf8$49v$1@build.eclipse.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com">http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com</a>

"Ed Merks" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com">&lt;Ed.Merks@gmail.com&gt;</a> wrote in message
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org">news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org</a>...
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dearly Beloved Board Reps,

I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
Eclipse Committers.

I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:

<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72</a>


At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.

Thanks a bundle (pun intended),

Denis


</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->

</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--------------010003010005060003020301--
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560913 is a reply to message #10187] Wed, 02 July 2008 17:23 Go to previous message
Scott Lewis is currently offline Scott Lewis
Messages: 964
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Ed and Darin,

Ed Merks wrote:
> Darin,
>
> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
> you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.
> Adding one thing generally means cutting another.


This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).

It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need this
(i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do as much
of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT processes, but
it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations (Denis' comment on
bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have priority over, say,
marketing budget, IP process budget, website development, etc?

I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining for
more resources, but I would assert that that process (the committer reps
have to continuously whine and complain and still don't get resources)
means something is broken in the resource allocation function of the
Board.

Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given the
way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination date and
discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and the other
committers that depend upon communications technologies like these to
work effectively with distributed cross-organizational (read actually
diverse) teams.

Scott
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560926 is a reply to message #10187] Wed, 02 July 2008 17:53 Go to previous message
Darin Swanson is currently offline Darin Swanson
Messages: 2386
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_072D_01C8DC53.6CE9B130
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yes...it was great to see Doug's post on the meeting. Almost as good as =
minutes ;-)

Just for total clarification...my "whine and complain" comment is meant =
in no way to knock the work of the committer reps nor the committers.

It was meant tongue in cheek since I was a committer rep and now am back =
on the other side of the fence strictly as a committer
I am priviledged to have the rarified experience of playing in both =
worlds and know the frustratations of both.

Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
"Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.eclipse.org...
Darin,

I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of =
you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut. =
Adding one thing generally means cutting another. I whined and =
complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages that =
would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home pages with =
crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed off at the pass =
and one less questionable activity to tie up the foundation's precious =
resource. Did you see Doug's blog about the meeting?

http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/



Darin Swanson wrote:=20
Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to =
bring up=20
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget=20
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, =
IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com

"Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message=20
news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the =
board=20
needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down =

to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
Dearly Beloved Board Reps,

I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are=20
requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for =

Eclipse Committers.

I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3D126089#c72


At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.

Thanks a bundle (pun intended),

Denis


=20


------=_NextPart_000_072D_01C8DC53.6CE9B130
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type =
content=3Dtext/html;charset=3DISO-8859-1>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.3268" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY text=3D#000000 bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yes...it was great to see Doug's post =
on the=20
meeting. Almost as good as minutes ;-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just for total clarification...my =
"whine and=20
complain" comment is meant in no way to knock the work of the committer =
reps nor=20
the committers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It was meant tongue in cheek since I =
was a=20
committer rep and now am back on the other side of the fence strictly as =
a=20
committer</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am priviledged to have the rarified =
experience of=20
playing in both worlds and know the frustratations of both.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><BR>Darins<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com">http://runnerwhocodes.blogspo=
t.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Ed Merks" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com">Ed.Merks@gmail.com</A>&gt; wrote in =
message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.eclipse.org">news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.ecli=
pse.org</A>...</DIV>Darin,<BR><BR>I=20
totally agree.&nbsp; It's just frustrating to have the budget in front =
of you=20
and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could =
cut.&nbsp; Adding=20
one thing generally means cutting another.&nbsp; I whined and =
complained about=20
board mandated navigation links on home pages that would be enforced =
by=20
foundation staff actively replacing home pages with crappy but =
conforming=20
ones, so at least that was headed off at the pass and one less =
questionable=20
activity to tie up the foundation's precious resource.&nbsp; Did you =
see=20
Doug's blog about the meeting?<A=20
href=3D"http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/"><BR></A>
<BLOCKQUOTE><A=20
=
href=3D"http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/">http://eclipse-commi=
tter-reps.blogspot.com/</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Darin=20
Swanson wrote:=20
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=3Dmid:g4gpf8$49v$1@build.eclipse.org =
type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Thanks for the update Ed.

I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to =
bring up=20
this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget=20
makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, =
IMHO.

It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
Darins
<A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com">http://runnerwhocodes.blogspo=
t.com</A>

"Ed Merks" <A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E =
href=3D"mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com">&lt;Ed.Merks@gmail.com&gt;</A> wrote =
in message=20
<A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org">news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.ecli=
pse.org</A>...
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Scott,

Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the =
board=20
needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down =

to "there's not enough money for that."


Scott Lewis wrote:
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Beloved Board Reps,

Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?

Scott



Denis Roy wrote:
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><PRE wrap=3D"">Dearly Beloved Board =
Reps,

I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are=20
requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for =

Eclipse Committers.

I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:

<A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-freetext =
href=3D"https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3D126089#c72">https=
://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3D126089#c72</A>


At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.

Thanks a bundle (pun intended),

Denis


</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE =
wrap=3D""><!---->

</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_072D_01C8DC53.6CE9B130--
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560939 is a reply to message #10232] Wed, 02 July 2008 18:59 Go to previous message
Scott Lewis is currently offline Scott Lewis
Messages: 964
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
It was rather surprising to see no mention of the XMPP Server for
Committers issue in Doug's notes. Is that because it wasn't discussed,
or because it was discussed but too controversial for a blog (or some
other reason)?

Scott

P.S. Since I was a committer rep also, I empathize with the frustrations
of 'whining and complaining'...we committers are a needful lot aren't
we...I suppose we could eliminate ourselves from the organization as a
cost saving measure...oh yeah...we don't cost anything...doh! ;-)


Darin Swanson wrote:
> Yes...it was great to see Doug's post on the meeting. Almost as good as
> minutes ;-)
>
> Just for total clarification...my "whine and complain" comment is meant
> in no way to knock the work of the committer reps nor the committers.
>
> It was meant tongue in cheek since I was a committer rep and now am back
> on the other side of the fence strictly as a committer
> I am priviledged to have the rarified experience of playing in both
> worlds and know the frustratations of both.
>
> Darins
> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>
> "Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com <mailto:Ed.Merks@gmail.com>> wrote in
> message news:g4gqcs$vuo$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Darin,
>
> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front
> of you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could
> cut. Adding one thing generally means cutting another. I whined
> and complained about board mandated navigation links on home pages
> that would be enforced by foundation staff actively replacing home
> pages with crappy but conforming ones, so at least that was headed
> off at the pass and one less questionable activity to tie up the
> foundation's precious resource. Did you see Doug's blog about the
> meeting?
> <http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/>
>
> http://eclipse-committer-reps.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> Darin Swanson wrote:
>> Thanks for the update Ed.
>>
>> I think the point is then that the Committer reps need to ensure to bring up
>> this issue and push for an increase in whatever line item in the budget
>> makes sense as the budget gets fleshed out for the next year.
>> Supporting, sustaining and enabling the committers just makes sense, IMHO.
>>
>> It is almost fun to just whine and complain :-)
>> Darins
>> http://runnerwhocodes.blogspot.com
>>
>> "Ed Merks" <Ed.Merks@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:g4gd40$nld$3@build.eclipse.org...
>>
>>> Scott,
>>>
>>> Sorry I forgot all about this issue. It's not really something the board
>>> needs to agree to do... A very large number of issues seem to boil down
>>> to "there's not enough money for that."
>>>
>>>
>>> Scott Lewis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Beloved Board Reps,
>>>>
>>>> Any word on this item from the most recent Board meeting?
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Denis Roy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dearly Beloved Board Reps,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to bring your attention to bug 126089, where folks are
>>>>> requesting the Eclipse Foundation set up and maintain an XMPP server for
>>>>> Eclipse Committers.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think my comment 72 describes mostly why this has not yet been set up:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c72
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At this point, I'd like to get your feedback on this issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a bundle (pun intended),
>>>>>
>>>>> Denis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560952 is a reply to message #10203] Sat, 12 July 2008 15:54 Go to previous message
Scott Lewis is currently offline Scott Lewis
Messages: 964
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Are the committer reps going to do anything about this issue? If so,
what? If not, why not?

Scott


Scott Lewis wrote:
> Hi Ed and Darin,
>
> Ed Merks wrote:
>> Darin,
>>
>> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front of
>> you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could cut.
>> Adding one thing generally means cutting another.
>
>
> This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).
>
> It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
> interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need this
> (i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do as much
> of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT processes, but
> it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations (Denis' comment on
> bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have priority over, say,
> marketing budget, IP process budget, website development, etc?
>
> I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining for
> more resources, but I would assert that that process (the committer reps
> have to continuously whine and complain and still don't get resources)
> means something is broken in the resource allocation function of the Board.
>
> Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
> resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given the
> way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination date and
> discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and the other
> committers that depend upon communications technologies like these to
> work effectively with distributed cross-organizational (read actually
> diverse) teams.
>
> Scott
>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560963 is a reply to message #10298] Sat, 12 July 2008 18:36 Go to previous message
Ed Merks is currently offline Ed Merks
Messages: 25750
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Scott,

This month's board meeting was canceled...

I've added Mike to the CC list for his comments. It seems clear that
the proposal has value and is supported. It's not clear that the
administrative overhead to support something like this prohibitive.
It's also not clear that something like this needs to be discussed by
the full board in order to resolve it given that it's a relatively minor
issue that could be handled directly by the EMO and in light of the fact
that various people have volunteered to help. What's your take? Would
a board discussion help bring this to resolution? If we can't resolve
this issue before the next board meeting, let's add it to the agenda...


Scott Lewis wrote:
> Are the committer reps going to do anything about this issue? If so,
> what? If not, why not?
>
> Scott
>
>
> Scott Lewis wrote:
>> Hi Ed and Darin,
>>
>> Ed Merks wrote:
>>> Darin,
>>>
>>> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front
>>> of you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could
>>> cut. Adding one thing generally means cutting another.
>>
>>
>> This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).
>>
>> It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
>> interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need
>> this (i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do
>> as much of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT
>> processes, but it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations
>> (Denis' comment on bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have
>> priority over, say, marketing budget, IP process budget, website
>> development, etc?
>>
>> I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining
>> for more resources, but I would assert that that process (the
>> committer reps have to continuously whine and complain and still
>> don't get resources) means something is broken in the resource
>> allocation function of the Board.
>>
>> Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
>> resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given
>> the way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination
>> date and discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and
>> the other committers that depend upon communications technologies
>> like these to work effectively with distributed cross-organizational
>> (read actually diverse) teams.
>>
>> Scott
>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560976 is a reply to message #10331] Sat, 12 July 2008 21:57 Go to previous message
Scott Lewis is currently offline Scott Lewis
Messages: 964
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Ed,

Ed Merks wrote:
> Scott,
>
> This month's board meeting was canceled...
>
> I've added Mike to the CC list for his comments. It seems clear that
> the proposal has value and is supported. It's not clear that the
> administrative overhead to support something like this prohibitive.
> It's also not clear that something like this needs to be discussed by
> the full board in order to resolve it given that it's a relatively minor
> issue that could be handled directly by the EMO and in light of the fact
> that various people have volunteered to help. What's your take?
Would
> a board discussion help bring this to resolution?


I don't particularly care if a Board discussion is had or not. I would
just like to see it possible to move forward on doing this (since I am
on the hook for doing much of the actual work involved in setup/config,
admin, etc...and *any* community effort is blocked by this IT resources
issue at the moment).

My larger observation (admittedly without all information, but perhaps
with the necessary information), is that the project's needs to build
software and community requires cooperation, communication, and
collaboration...as diverse projects have teams spread all over the
world. Although largely hidden, the cost of such cooperation,
communication/collaboration is currently unnecessarily high (i.e. takes
a lot of time/effort on someone's part).

If the Foundation/Board want to actually have EF projects work together
rather than as individual silos, and be diverse rather than corporate
pet projects, then they must provide some resources to help them in
doing these things, rather than simply mandate things without providing
any project-level resources (or worse yet, not mandate project diversity
or cross-project collaboration...or worse yet, require the projects to
do other things...like all their own build infrastructure, or their own
integration testing...with little/no assistance/support for doing so).

In my view this is inevitably a choice between allocating EF resources
for other things (e.g. marketing, IP process, councils, strategy, etc)
and 'committer resources'. As a committer member of EF, I believe that
the committers are getting a rather short stick, small slice of
pie...use whatever metaphor is appealing to you...especially compared
with the value they are creating via (e.g.) the Ganymede release.

FWIW, XMPP server is but one such technology/request coming from the
committers. Here are the current Community enhancement requests:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advan ced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&c lassification=Eclipse+Foundation&product=Community&l ong_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc _type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard _type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_typ e=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=A SSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_severity=enhancement &priority=P1&priority=P2&priority=P3&priorit y=P4&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=sub string&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&vot es=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=& ;cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&fie ld0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=

Scott


If we can't resolve
> this issue before the next board meeting, let's add it to the agenda...
>
>
> Scott Lewis wrote:
>> Are the committer reps going to do anything about this issue? If so,
>> what? If not, why not?
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>> Scott Lewis wrote:
>>> Hi Ed and Darin,
>>>
>>> Ed Merks wrote:
>>>> Darin,
>>>>
>>>> I totally agree. It's just frustrating to have the budget in front
>>>> of you and then realize there isn't exactly lots of fluff one could
>>>> cut. Adding one thing generally means cutting another.
>>>
>>>
>>> This seems to me to be the main Board-level issue (as always).
>>>
>>> It seems to me that the longevity of the xmpp server request, and the
>>> interest/votes indicate that a number of committers sincerely need
>>> this (i.e. it isn't just me :). Volunteers like me are willing to do
>>> as much of the IT work as is possible given EF security and IT
>>> processes, but it's *still* blocked by EF IT resource limitations
>>> (Denis' comment on bug). My question is this: why shouldn't it have
>>> priority over, say, marketing budget, IP process budget, website
>>> development, etc?
>>>
>>> I know you reps are put in the position of whining and complaining
>>> for more resources, but I would assert that that process (the
>>> committer reps have to continuously whine and complain and still
>>> don't get resources) means something is broken in the resource
>>> allocation function of the Board.
>>>
>>> Of course I would expect a 'no way...everything is great with the
>>> resource allocation of the EF/Board' response from some...but given
>>> the way this has gone down (for 2+ years now...see bug origination
>>> date and discussion thread), I don't think that will convince me and
>>> the other committers that depend upon communications technologies
>>> like these to work effectively with distributed cross-organizational
>>> (read actually diverse) teams.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #560990 is a reply to message #10265] Fri, 01 August 2008 14:35 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: dcarver.starstandard.org

If there is no time or resources available, why don't the eclipse
committers use one of the many freely available already setup servers
listed at Jabber.org?

http://www.jabber.org/im-services

Seems easier than having to have eclipse setup a server, and get
everything in place.

Dave
Re: XMPP Server for Committers [message #561043 is a reply to message #10399] Mon, 04 August 2008 01:37 Go to previous message
Scott Lewis is currently offline Scott Lewis
Messages: 964
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Dave/others interested in this thread.

See https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=126089#c95 and follow
ups for responses to this question.

Scott

David Carver wrote:
> If there is no time or resources available, why don't the eclipse
> committers use one of the many freely available already setup servers
> listed at Jabber.org?
>
> http://www.jabber.org/im-services
>
> Seems easier than having to have eclipse setup a server, and get
> everything in place.
>
> Dave
Previous Topic:Ideas to help Community Members become Committers
Next Topic:Ideas to help Community Members become Committers
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Apr 24 01:55:06 EDT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03034 seconds